Advertisement

Ultrasound characteristics of subdermally implanted Implanon contraceptive rods

  • Athena Lantz
    Affiliations
    Department of Radiology, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • John L. Nosher
    Correspondence
    Name and address for correspondence: John L. Nosher, M.D., UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. Department of Radiology, MEB #404, One Robert Wood Johnson Place, CN-19, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903; Tel.: (908) 235-7721; Fax: (908) 235-6889
    Affiliations
    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Samuel Pasquale
    Affiliations
    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Randall L. Siegel
    Affiliations
    Department of Radiology, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ USA
    Search for articles by this author
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Abstract

      This study was designed to define sonographic characteristics and the optimal sonographic technique for localization of the single rod Implanon system.
      Diagnostic ultrasonography was performed in eight women who had the Implanon rod implanted in the medial aspect of the upper arm. All implants were scanned in the longitudinal and transverse direction using 3.5 MHz, 5 MHz, and 7.5 MHz linear array transducers. Scanning was performed both directly against the skin and with 2 and 4 cm Kiteco ultrasound stand-off pads. Each image obtained was evaluated for detectability of the Implanon rod and the grade of acoustic shadowing produced by the Implanon rod by two independent observers. Discrepancies in evaluation were adjudicated by a third observer.
      The Implanon rod implant was not directly identified using the transducer and standoff pad combinations. Implanon rods were indirectly identified as a result of the posterior acoustic shadow cast by the Implanon. Best demonstration was achieved with the 5 or 7.5 MHz transducer and a 2 cm stand-off pad in the transverse direction.
      Appropriate ultrasonographic technique and familiarity with posterior acoustic shadowing patterns generated by the implant provide a noninvasive method for localization of nonpalpable, single rod implants prior to removal.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Contraception
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Sarma SP
        • Wamsher JG
        Removal of deeply inserted, nonpalpable levonorgestrel (Norplant®) implants.
        Contraception. 1996; 53: 159-161
        • Twickler DM
        • Schwarz BE
        Imaging of the levonorgestrel implantable contraceptive device.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 167: 572-573
        • Geelen JAA
        • vanderWardt JTH
        • Vooran G
        • et al.
        Release kinetics of 3-keto-desogestrel from contraceptive implants (Implanon) in dogs: comparison with in vitro data.
        Contraception. 1993; 47: 215-226
        • Diaz S
        • Pavez M
        • Moo-Young AJ
        • et al.
        Clinical trials with a 3-ketodesogestrel subdermal implant.
        Contraception. 1991; 44: 393-408
        • Darney PD
        Hormonal implants: contraception for a new century.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 170: 1536-1543
        • Glauser SJ
        • Scharling ES
        • Stovall TG
        • Zagoria RJ
        Ultrasonography: usefulness in localization of the Norplant contraceptive implant system.
        J Ultrasound Med. 1995; 14: 411-414